[Frequency of decubitus ulcer in patients of a university medical center. Combination of routine documentation and cross-sectional study].

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pressure ulcer is a relevant issue for quality management and cost containment of hospitals. Cross-sectional studies are the typical design to estimate the frequency of pressure ulcers. The derived point prevalence rate is not as good for a case related reference value as the period prevalence rate. The interdisciplinary pressure ulcer project at the University Clinics in Essen combined a routine documentation with a cross-sectional survey, thus providing both measurements for the first time.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The routine and computer-based collection of information about pressure ulcers started in March 2003, using the patient administration system medico//s from Siemens. Findings are presented from 49,904 admissions, starting on 91/03/2004, discharged by 31/03/2004. The mean age was 48.7 +/- 22.4 years; 51.2 % were males, 48.8 % females. Additionally, a decubitus team examined patients from randomly selected wards each work-day. The real period prevalence rate was calculated using the observed period prevalence rate, the sensitivity and the point prevalence rate.

RESULTS

In the routine documentation, 700 pressure ulcers had been recorded from 49,904 inpatient cases (period prevalence rate 1.4 %). The decubitus team did 5,415 examinations and 294 times detected at least one pressure ulcer (point prevalence rate 5.4 %). Estimated results in three different period prevalence rates: 3.0 % using sensitivity of the routine documentation, 3.7 % using sensitivity stratified for departments, and 2.3 % using the point prevalence rate for cases with short, medium, and long length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The project presents for the first time reference values for pressure ulcer frequency in university clinics. A comparison with international rates is hindered by unpublished sensitivity values. In view of the higher point prevalence rate of 10 % present in the literature, a period prevalence rate of 5 % is a realistic reference value.